MA - Professor Karen Read, 43, charged with murdering police officer boyfriend John O'Keefe by hitting him with car, Canton, 14 Apr 2023 #20 Retrial

[arielilane]

Day One: One witness thanks to Jackson.

Let it go, Jackson. Not a good look beating (bullying) a witness. Try kindness. moo

 

[KSwizzle]

Day One: One witness thanks to Jackson.

Let it go, Jackson. Not a good look beating (bullying) a witness. Try kindness. moo

The paramedic isn’t being truthful moo

 

[arielilane]

I'm sorry. Please humor me. What is Moo?

moo = matter of opinion
Websleuths Lingo

 

[Derph]

I think it would be epic if the Defense called Brennan to the stand to ask 1 or 3 questions about who hired him and why no one in the DA's office could prosecute the case? I also think it would be equally epic if they called Lally as well and aske him why he isn't prosecuting the case a 2nd time. I know they probably can't but I think it would pretty great.

IMO I think Lally is completely empty and neutered. He has the 1000yrd stare every time the camera pans across the room. He looks like he's just staring a hole thru the desk in front of him.

The bias of the judge is again rearing it's ugly head. To interupt the Defense and flat out exclaim " NO. we're not watching the video again!" What the hell is going on here???!!! This is such bologna in my opinion.

 

[dlsully62]

I think it would be epic if the Defense called Brennan to the stand to ask 1 or 3 questions about who hired him and why no one in the DA's office could prosecute the case? I also think it would be equally epic if they called Lally as well and aske him why he isn't prosecuting the case a 2nd time. I know they probably can't but I think it would pretty great.

IMO I think Lally is completely empty and neutered. He has the 1000yrd stare every time the camera pans across the room. He looks like he's just staring a hole thru the desk in front of him.

The bias of the judge is again rearing it's ugly head. To interupt the Defense and flat out exclaim " NO. we're not watching the video again!" What the hell is going on here???!!! This is such bologna in my opinion.

I too, think this judge is biased. Not real sure what anyone can do about that but it sure makes for an unfair trial.

 

[LvsAMystry]

The paramedic isn’t being truthful moo

Nope “I have no idea who the homeowner is.” This is what gets me I know the lies.

 

[jepop]

I think it would be epic if the Defense called Brennan to the stand to ask 1 or 3 questions about who hired him and why no one in the DA's office could prosecute the case? I also think it would be equally epic if they called Lally as well and aske him why he isn't prosecuting the case a 2nd time. I know they probably can't but I think it would pretty great.

IMO I think Lally is completely empty and neutered. He has the 1000yrd stare every time the camera pans across the room. He looks like he's just staring a hole thru the desk in front of him.

The bias of the judge is again rearing it's ugly head. To interupt the Defense and flat out exclaim " NO. we're not watching the video again!" What the hell is going on here???!!! This is such bologna in my opinion.

Unbelievable. She is such a poor judge. It does my head in.

 

[Angelwatch]

The paramedic isn’t being truthful moo

I have a hard time distinguishing not being truthful and just misremembering. I'd make a terrible witness probably. I walk into a room sometimes and forget why I'm there. Haha. I think there are many people who will outright lie in this trial. I'm not sure I'd go so far to say Nuttal is one of them; though his testimony has changed and that's an issue.

 

[mrjitty]

I think it would be epic if the Defense called Brennan to the stand to ask 1 or 3 questions about who hired him and why no one in the DA's office could prosecute the case? I also think it would be equally epic if they called Lally as well and aske him why he isn't prosecuting the case a 2nd time. I know they probably can't but I think it would pretty great.

IMO I think Lally is completely empty and neutered. He has the 1000yrd stare every time the camera pans across the room. He looks like he's just staring a hole thru the desk in front of him.

The bias of the judge is again rearing it's ugly head. To interupt the Defense and flat out exclaim " NO. we're not watching the video again!" What the hell is going on here???!!! This is such bologna in my opinion.

I don't think there is much mystery. Lally is a competent careerist who was out of his depth in trial 1. Actually fairly common in cases where the defendant can afford top tier attorneys. Brennan is a different weight class. Lally can play an important supporting role in T2 given his level of familiarity with the content.

Brennan vs Jackson is the chance to see two elite tier attorneys go head to head.

 

[Elliot_Alderson]

Defense strategy: Cheat in order to win their case. Shameful. Just like the first trial. Did not disappoint, again! moo

How did they cheat exactly? By not succumbing to Trooper Paul saying it happened the way he said because "it just did", or by having experts hired by the FBI that said JOK couldn't have been struck by a car? Or by having a judge who is blatantly on the side of the CW?

 

[mrjitty]

I have a hard time distinguishing not being truthful and just misremembering. I'd make a terrible witness probably. I walk into a room sometimes and forget why I'm there. Haha. I think there are many people who will outright lie in this trial. I'm not sure I'd go so far to say Nuttal is one of them; though his testimony has changed and that's an issue.

Fairly common with eye witnesses IMO. What we are really seeing is the skill of Jackson to pick things apart between his various times on the stand.

 

[shotgun09]

I think Mr Nuttal needs a paramedic. Dude was just annihilated by Jackson.

 

[Leilei]

I think Mr Nuttal needs a paramedic. Dude was just annihilated by Jackson.

They'd best keep the paramedics on standby, then, because it's going to be a loooonnng trial, and Jackson doesn't play.
IMO.

 

[minazoe]

moo = matter of opinion
Websleuths Lingo

or my opinion only.

 

[justtrish]

As far as Nuttal's testimony goes, he comes across to me as a competent medic. His misremembering the puffy doesn't bother me. That he can be pressured to change his recollection about hearing I hit him three times from twice is more bothersome, but I'm not sure that I would discard his testimony if I was a juror. I think Karen said "could I have hit him" or "did I hit him" and in the chaos of the situation, Nuttal heard I hit him.

I'm so curious what the jurors are thinking right now.

I am listening to his testimony now and he said he got out of the ambulance and he noticed the wind had picked up and visibility was not great. So I think it's safe to say that it is harder to hear when it's windy. He very well could have missed hearing did I or could I and instead just heard I hit him.. even did I hit him could be heard as I hit him. When we don't hear well we try to make sense of what we are hearing and so even hearing hit him could have lead him to interpret it as I hit him. JMO

 

[LvsAMystry]

So Kerry Roberts didn’t see the cracked taillight at JOK house at the last trial but at this trial she remembers seeing it. Ok

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

Excellent opening by Attorney Brennan. Exceeded my expectations. Science and data, exactly what a jury wants.

CW: Concise, truth.
Defense: Story telling - lies - Jurors dont like to be lied to.

Defense opening nothing but lies. No surprise there, did not disappoint.

Also, Jackson, no need to yell at the jury during opening and no need to try to discredit a witness that saves lives for a living.

Defense weak lawyering - the type to question witnesses as if they’re the defendant. Beating up the witness not a good look. Give it up, Jackson.

Apparently, defense plan is same as 1st trial beating up the witnesses.

Remember Karen Read is the only defendant on trial and she is accused of killing John O'Keefe and leaving him to die in the snow. Period.

It’s been established by Karen Read herself that she said: "I hit him, I hit him" I hit him, doesnt matter how many times she said it. It's been confirmed by her she said it. She's changed her story so many times, hard to keep up.

and…

"I didn’t think I hit him, hit him but could I have clipped him? Could Ive tagged him in the knee and incapacitated him, he didn’t look mortally wounded as far as I could see but could I have done something that knocked him out in his drunkenness and in the cold didn’t come to again."


matter of opinion

Respectfully, there is to my understanding considerable dispute on exactly what KR might have stated. Including any utterances relating to an incident with JOK. And there was IIUC testimony in evidence in the first trial of this very point.

Unfortunately IMO this seems to get overlooked.

For example, this WCBV 5 ABC online May 17, 2024 article by Jamy Pombo Sesselman entitled ‘Karen Read murder trial: Witness Jennifer McCabe says Read yelled, 'Did I hit him?'’:

Karen Read murder trial: Witness says Read yelled, 'Did I hit him?'

She's accused of killing her Boston police officer boyfriend by striking him with an SUV and leaving him to die in a snowbank.

www.wcvb.com

 

[detectivewannab]

Who are the people sitting to the side of Karen?

 

[MerlinFalcon]

AJ is super aggressive with this paramedic.

 

[Derph]

Ah yes the hardworkin' ol'5 hr workday. Way to push this along judge.